Who will get custody of Padres organization in Moores divorce?

tim_sullivan

The Pebble Beach place is in play. For a mere $35 million, John Moores is prepared to part with a property overlooking the Pacific and the 18th fairway of one of the world's most glorious golf courses. Multiple listings describe the 10,500-square-foot residence as "breathtaking and irreplaceable."

Question: Why would a rich man sell such a remarkable home on so stunning a spot in the midst of a real estate slump?

Answer: The best guess is divorce.

The Padres' majority owner appears to be in liquidation mode, selling off pieces of his vast empire in order to satisfy the community property requirements of ending a marriage in California. Yet exactly what that might mean for his ballclub is still hard to forecast five months after Becky Moores filed for dissolution.

Day to day, Padres CEO Sandy Alderson continues to run the club with near-absolute autonomy. Long-term control, however, is less clear. Though Becky Moores remains a regular at Petco Park -- and accompanied the Padres on their recent trip to Yankee Stadium -- her estranged husband has become an absentee owner this season. Except for a Padres board meeting during spring training and the opening of the club's complex in the Dominican Republic, the 63-year-old entrepreneur has become virtually invisible.

"I think I've seen him once (since spring training)," pitcher Jake Peavy said before Sunday's game. "He brought some kids through the clubhouse before a game and I signed some autographs for them."

Associates say Moores now spends most of his time in Texas. San Diego State Athletic Director Jeff Schemmel says he continues to speak to his major donor regularly, but typically on the telephone.

"Not that I saw him a lot anyway," Schemmel said. "(But) he wasn't at as many basketball games -- we certainly noticed that."

What gives? Who knows? Neither the owner nor his divorce attorney, Robert J. Nachshin, responded to interview requests. Though several baseball sources indicated Moores is now inclined to retain controlling interest in the ballclub, his position on that point is said to have fluctuated in recent months. State law, meanwhile, means the matter is not entirely within his control.

You can't easily divide a divorce asset 50/50 -- as California requires -- while leaving only one of the two parties in control. Neither can you split decision-making responsibility between two people and comply with the baseball policy that stipulates each franchise must have only one controlling owner.

Should Becky Moores choose to press these points -- and insiders report she has keen interest in gaining control of the club -- the Padres may be headed toward an impasse and/or a sale.

Because the Padres represent so significant a share of John Moores' holdings -- the franchise was valued at $385 million by Forbes magazine in April -- and because the ballclub is so saddled with debt, splitting it up was bound to prove problematic. Unlike Boston Red Sox owner John Henry, who filed for divorce last May, John Moores did not take the precaution of a prenuptial agreement when he married the girl from his high school history class at 19 years old.

"In high-asset divorces such as the Mooreses', this can be particularly complicated when a large portion of the net estate is one asset," said attorney Judi S. Foley, a family law specialist and Padres season-ticket holder. "Depending on how the couple allocated management of this large asset, dividing (it) can wreak havoc in the future of the asset.

"As a San Diegan, and a longtime Padres fan, I dread the consequences that could flow from a bitter, prolonged battle over the ownership and ultimate management of the franchise."

The anxiety Foley felt was addressed soon after the divorce petition was filed, when Padres front office staffers were told to expect no significant changes. Sandra Morris, the attorney for Becky Moores, echoed that attitude when she told the Union-Tribune: "Everybody's got the best interest of the Padres in mind. They will do everything they can to protect the Padres."

Some insiders interpreted this to mean that both parties intended for the team to pass to their daughter, Jennifer. Others viewed the pronouncements more warily, anticipating friction.

When the Mooreses agreed in April to pursue confidential mediation as the primary means of resolving their differences, the prospect of a bitter, public battle was diminished. The selection of retired Judge Thomas Ashworth III to mediate was similarly soothing, this despite Ashworth's staunch allegiance to the Los Angeles Dodgers.

"Tom is probably the best person I can imagine for keeping things calm, cool and collected; for being even-handed," Foley said of Ashworth's involvement. "That's fabulous news."

Foley said Becky Moores' hiring of Morris, however, conveyed something of a "mixed message."

"She's known as a litigator," Foley said of Morris. "She's not known as someone to hold hands."

Neither is Nachshin, John Moores' attorney. Though his stated preference is to advocate on behalf of the poorer party in a divorce -- "You feel like a gladiator," Nachshin once told the Los Angeles Times -- his celebrity practice has represented the deep pockets of athletes Barry Bonds, Bret Saberhagen, Gary Sheffield and Oscar De La Hoya, singers Buck Owens and David Cassidy and Disney CEO Robert Iger.

Part of the appeal of the mediation process is its confidentiality. Part of the leverage available to both sides is the potential fallout from taking the case public. That Morris was moved to subpoena the business records of John Moores' JMI Inc. last month does not necessarily mean the case is becoming more contentious, but neither would it suggest an amicable discovery process.

"It's so far over my head," Peavy said. "There's nothing we can do in this (clubhouse) to control it. I just wish them all the best. ... I think the world of Becky and John and Jennifer and all they've done for my family, and not just financially."

John and Becky Moores are rightly renowned for their philanthropy. As yet unknown is how much generosity they still feel toward each other.